Friday, February 24, 2006

Back Me Up

Some people agreed with me.

| Tags || |

Thus spake Mr. McBastard -

6 comments:

  1. Anonymous2/26/2006 2:12 PM

    I was really glad to see that others wrote responses similar to your's. I was especially impressed with Mr. Scott's reply.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous2/26/2006 2:13 PM

    again, that last post was me. -mags

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mr. McBastard2/28/2006 2:09 AM

    Tunahell, despite Stellar's farcical question, I'm sure she realizes that there is more to sexuality that desiring a penis or a vagina. (Speaking of "condescention and presumption," you best check yo'self befo'e you wreck yo'self.) The point she was trying to make is that no one consciously decides to be gay, just as no one consciously makes a decision to be straight.

    The misunderstaning here seems to stem from your, Tunahell, examination of the societal implications of homosexuality and Stellar's physical/psychological position on homosexuality.

    And I'll state it again: The assertion that humans are so far advanced above any other species ("Animals have limited cognitive abilities and don’t make such sophisticated choices. Humans can make choices...it is our God given right.") that we must have advanced sexuality as well is an exaggeration. As humans we are subject and do submit to the same sexual desires as many other animals, because humans are animals.

    ReplyDelete
  4. PW2/28/2006 11:33 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  5. PW2/28/2006 11:37 AM

    "Technically, using another species' sexual habits really isn't a very realistic or accurate comparison to human sexual practices. Humans are much more complex beings, with emotions and mind."

    Prop to Magster for the previous statements. Morality aside, homosexuality aside, name-calling aside: We are more than mere animals. We are animals, yes. But we are also so much more. It is true that we are subordinate to the biological urges of our physical, animal bodies, but it is every bit as true that we are also subordinate to our minds and our hearts. Our minds have produced technologies that have advanced our species beyond what any other on our planet can duplicate. Many use tools, and even language, but none have mastered agriculture, urbanification, mass transportation, mass communication, or even departure from our planet. And these are only accomplishments of the mind. Driving many of these are the deeper, unseen potentialities of the human heart. Love, loyalty, service; hatred, bigotry, genocide: these are just a few examples of the human heart in action. Animals exist in none of these emotional realms. The most intense affection of a dog, or the most aggressive anger of a bull bear but shadowy consequences in comparison to the far-reaching effects of human emotional activity. "We are more than carbon and chemicals," as Dustin Kenstrue would scream.

    As mindful, soulful creatures, we have the luxury of living lives filled with activities other than acquiring food and perpetuating the species. We not only have the time to amuse ourselves with hobbies, we have the time to muse the worlds in and beyond our own immediate existence. Humans alone have artists, philosophers, and prophets. I am not even speaking of the Divine, but merely the unexaggerated difference between homo sapiens and every other animal on the planet. Putting value judgement aside, we are dominant. We have an energy economy that simply cannot be compared with that of other animals, partly because it includes so many types of animals in ways they cannot include each other. In addition, we live separate from them in our and emotional and spiritual world. We are alone; even our dearest pets cannot commune with us the way we commune with each other.

    So whether or not your Orangutan, Jill, is a lesbian or your neighbor wants to hump your leg, our deep ancestors stared at the moon for millenia and our grandfathers dreamed of it. Humanity has tread lunar soil, and we have so much further yet to go. These are but glimpses of our species' unconscious quest to be who we are and so much more. And that is what it is to be hyper-animal: human.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mr. McBastard3/01/2006 1:51 PM

    Tunahell, I don't think anyone posting on this site ever asserted that homosexuality had a biological. I think the only assertion that was made was that it was not a conscious decision.

    This is not to say that some sexual choices can be made consciously. I could choose to have sex with someone I'm not attracted to (you, in your example). But I don't want to.

    The truth is that sex is used for many different reasons in the human AND in the animal world (since we seem so keen on separating the two). Sex can be used to gain favor, advance in social status, bargain for other needs, procreate, or simply just for fun. Some animals do have sex with their mothers, sisters, brothers, etc. Some people also have sex with their immediate family as well. But human culture calls these people "mentally ill" because it's a rule that we've thought up that you can't have sex with your family. Animal societies have these rules to: you can't have sex with the alpha without permission, you can't have sex with the alpha's mates, etc. This doesn't make that animal "wrong" or "sinful" it just means he's operationg outside of the society's rules.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Circa Now